As promised, we’re back with the other two decisions from Monday: Alleyne v. United States (11-9335), overruling Harris v. United States (2002) and holding that facts that increase the mandatory minimum penalty for a crime must be submitted to a jury; and Salinas v. Texas (12-246), on whether prosecutors may use a defendant’s silence during a noncustodial interview as evidence of guilt. These
Read More Alleyne v. United States (11-9335) and Salinas v. Texas (12-246)
FTC v. Actavis, Inc. (12-416), Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (12-71), Maracich v. Spears (12-25) and Order List
Posted in OT12, Supreme Court Updates
It looks like the Court is finally kicking into high gear, issuing five decisions yesterday with fourteen more to go by the end of next week. This Update will bring you FTC v. Actavis, Inc. (12-416), holding that reverse payment patent settlements are subject to antitrust scrutiny under the rule of reason, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (12-71), striking down…
Read More FTC v. Actavis, Inc. (12-416), Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (12-71), Maracich v. Spears (12-25) and Order List
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (12-398), United States v. Davila (12-167), American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (11-798) and Tarrant Regional Water District v. Hermann (11-889)
Posted in OT12, Supreme Court Updates
Thursday saw the calm before the storm, as the Court kicked out four more-or-less unanimous decisions ahead of the more contentious decisions we expect in the coming two weeks. First up is the highly anticipated gene-patent decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (12-398), where the Court confirmed that human DNA is not patentable. We’ll follow that with United States v. …
Oxford Health Plans v. Sutter (12-135), Peugh v. United States (12-62) and Horne v. Department of Agriculture (12-123)
Posted in OT12, Supreme Court Updates
We are well into the month of June, which can mean only one thing: more Supreme Court decisions! Today we have Oxford Health Plans v. Sutter (12-135), addressing an arbitrator’s authority to construe the scope of an arbitration agreement; Peugh v. United States (12-62), finding that retroactive application of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines may violate the Ex Post Facto clause; and Horne v. …
Read More Oxford Health Plans v. Sutter (12-135), Peugh v. United States (12-62) and Horne v. Department of Agriculture (12-123)
Maryland v. King (12-207), Hillman v. Maretta (11-1221), and Nevada v. Jackson (12-694)
Posted in OT12, Supreme Court Updates
The Court issued three decisions on Monday to kick off its annual June rush to the finish line. First up is Maryland v. King (12-207), a major criminal procedure decision upholding a state law mandating DNA swabs for individuals arrested for serious crimes. We’ll follow that with Hillman v. Maretta (11-1221), a federal preemption case that managed to inspire three opinions, despite its…
Read More Maryland v. King (12-207), Hillman v. Maretta (11-1221), and Nevada v. Jackson (12-694)
City of Arlington, Texas v. FCC (11-1545 and 11-1547), McQuiggin v. Perkins (12-126), and Trevino v. Thaler (11-10189)
Posted in OT12, Supreme Court Updates
Today we bring you City of Arlington, Texas v. FCC (11-1545 and 11-1547), a vigorous reaffirmation of Chevron deference to agencies’ interpretation of ambiguous statutes, including those provisions regarding the scope of the agency’s power; McQuiggin v. Perkins (12-126), finding an “actual innocence” exception to AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations; and Trevino v. Thaler (11-10189), expanding an “it was my postconviction lawyer’s…
Read More City of Arlington, Texas v. FCC (11-1545 and 11-1547), McQuiggin v. Perkins (12-126), and Trevino v. Thaler (11-10189)